TATA CONVOY DRIVERS CONGRESS AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these writ applications have been heard together and are being disposed of herewith as the facts and the questions of law are almost similar. Petitioner numbers 2 to 6 of the first case are convoy drivers and claim to be the members of petitioner No. 1, Tata Convoy drivers Congress, a registered union. The three petitioners of the second case are similarly the members of another registered Trade Union, namely, All India Convoy Workers Union. Undisputedly, they transport the trucks produced by M/s. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Company Ltd (in common parlance called as 'Telco'). According to the practice and system employed by Telco, they take the services of the convoy drivers through the agency of Transport Contractors which has been described for brevity as, T.T.C.A. (Telco Transport Contractors Association). The association of the Transport contractors of the Telco. Ltd. has also been impleaded as respondent No. 4. From a perusal of the statements made in the writ applications and the various annexures made thereto, it is apparent that the convoy drivers have been agitating from time to time for better service conditions and there has been various settlements from time to time arrived at between their Union and the T.T.C.A., for example; memorandum of settlement dated 31.1.1973 (Annexure -2) (of the 2nd case) memorandum of settlement dated 31.1.1979 (Annexure -I/A) and a tripartite settlement dated 15.4.1980 (Annexure -11) (both of the first case.)

(2.) The claim of the petitioners is that they made a further demand that they should be treated to be the employees of the Telco. Ltd. and, thus be held entitled to all the benefits available to their workmen. A list of the demands was accordingly made by petitioner No. 1 (first case) by its letter dated 25.12.1978 (Annexure 5 to the first case) threatening with a strike notice if their demands were not conceded. It made these averments: - -

(3.) The petitioners after having prayed for quashing of the said letter dated 26.2.79 as well as the letter dated 5.1.73 issued by respondent No. 2 containing opinion of the Law Department (annexure -8/B), have further prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the concerned respondents to refer the disputes raised by the petitioners to an appropriate Tribunal for its fair adjudication.